BT 440 

Copy 1 



> 



BT 440 
.D7 

Copy 1 Wf)C 



rial of $e$us 

From Zf&totsh Sources 



BY 

RABBI A. P. DRUCKER 




NEW YORK: 
BLOCH PUBLISHING COMPANY 
1907 




Zvinl of ^esue 

From Zfdlfoish Sources 



BY 

RABBI A. P. DRUCKER 




NEW YORK: 
BLOCH PUBLISHING COMPANY 
1907 



IPRARY ■■' CONGRESS 
One v/i^* neceiv^i 

I FEB 0^08 

/ COPY A, 



Copyrighted, 1907, by 
RABBI A. P. DRUCKER 

Gift 

Author 

20 F ? 08 



>3 

d 

vie 



PREFACE 

Many of my readers are doubtless familiar 
with the fact that there are traditions current 
in Jewish history concerning the life and death of 
Jesus which differ somewhat from those handed 
down by the Christian Church. What will 
probably surprise them is the statement that, 
though these traditions do differ from the nar- 
ratives of the New Testament, they do not in the 
least oppose or contradict, but, on the contrary, 
rather confirm and corroborate the accounts of 
the Apostles. In many cases these traditions 
throw new light on the events; show the true na- 
ture and the undisclosed plans of the principal 
men of those days. They reveal to us the true 
character of those who played an important part 
in the great drama enacted at Jerusalem nineteen 
hundred years ago. They raise the curtain of 
obscurity from the stage of those days, and pre- 
sent to our gaze a distinct and clear picture of the 
happenings at that epoch-making period. These 
Jewish traditions rather supplement the account 
of the Bible, and, if placed side by side with the 
gospel account, would give a new interpretation 
to those great events. The two explain each other, 
the one supplying what was omitted by the other. 



CONTENTS 

CHAPTER PAGE 

I. Jewish Traditions Supplement the Nar- 
ratives of the New Testament, . 5 

II. Jesus Not Tried by a Jewish Court, . 10 

III. The Charges against Jesus un-Jewish, 16 

IV. Pilate, the Spaniard, . . . .21 

V. Pilate in His True Light, . . .28 

VI. "Render Unto Cesar the Things which 

are Cesar's," 33 

VII. Caiaphas a Roman Spy, . . . .36 

VIII. The Galileans Whose Blood Pilate 

Mingled with the Sacrifices, . . 41 

IX. Pilate Surrenders to Jesus, . . 45 

X. The Conspiracy of the High Priest, . 48 
XI. Jesus Falsely Accused of Idolatry, . 53 

XII. The Jews Betrayed on All Sides, . 59 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 

I 

Jewish Traditions Supplement the Narra- 
tives of the New Testament 

Without a thorough knowledge of Jewish 
history, the New Testament cannot be correctly 
and truthfully understood. For instance, it is 
absolutely impossible, from the account of the 
Apostles alone, to determine the name and the 
authority of the assembly convened by the High 
Priest, Caiaphas, to try Jesus on the famous 
Passover night. It was not the great Jewish 
tribunal, yepouaia, or, as sometimes mistakenly 
called, Sanhedrin; because that body was not in 
existence at the time of Jesus. It was abolished 
by Herod in 40 B.C. (" Jewish Encyc," vol. 6, 
Herod ; " Jewish History," Graetz, vol. 2, chap. 
IV.; Talmud, Baba Bathra, 3a.) 

It was not until 42 c.e. (eighty-two years later) 
that the Sanhedrin was reinstated by Agrippa I. 
Besides, it can be proved from the proceedings 

5 



6 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 

at the trial and from the accusation and judgment 
rendered, that there was nothing Jewish at the 
trial, and that it was not in accordance with the 
laws and customs of the Sanhedrin. This will 
become evident when we consider the following 
points : 

i. According to the laws of procedure of the 
yepoixna, *no one could be brought to trial unless 
absolute proofs of his guilt were placed in the 
hands of the Hazzan (sheriff), who alone had 
charge of the arrest and custody of criminals. 
It was also necessary to be proved to him, before 
an order of arrest was issued, that witnesses had 
warned the transgressor not to commit the sin, 
and that he had defied them; for, if the culprit 
was ignorant of the law, or did not know that 
his crime was punishable by the courts, the law 
had no jurisdiction over him. Ignorance of the 
law was the safest and easiest plea in a Jewish 
court. (Talmud, San., 8b, 8ob, 72b, 41a; Mai- 
monides, 12:2). Not one of the Apostles makes 
mention of proofs of warning given to Jesus, or 
of defiance on his part, or even of his ever having 
committed a sin against the Jewish law. 
; 2. There was really no direct evidence brought 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 7 



out against Jesus at any point in the trial, all the 
witnesses, we are told, testifying from hearsay 
or rumor. To have permitted such testimony 
against Jesus to come before the judges would 
have been absolutely in violation of the estab- 
lished laws and customs of the Sanhedrin. No 
circumstantial evidence was permitted to be in- 
troduced before the judges of a Jewish criminal 
tribunal. (TaL, San., 37b; Shevuoth, 34a.) 

3. The judges had to be impartial until they 
had heard and carefully examined all the evidence 
brought before them. If one of the judges, by 
some mistake, participated in the preparation of 
the case, the procuring of witnesses, or the 
obtaining of testimony; or if one happened to 
express an opinion before the trial, or if he were 
an enemy or a relative of the accused, he was not 
allowed to sit in judgment on the case. (Mishna, 
San., 3, III; do., TaL, 27b, 7b; Maim., San., 21 125.) 
In the New Testament, we are told that the High 
Priest prevailed upon Judas to betray his Master, 
and also sought witnesses against Jesus; and that, 
in many other ways, he had shown himself hos- 
tile to the prisoner from the beginning. Never- 
theless, he was permitted not only to sit in judg- 



§ THE TRIAL OF JESUS 



ment, but even to preside as chief judge over 
this trial (Matthew 26:59). Surely no Jewish 
court would have tolerated so much violation 
of the law on the part of the president of the 
court. 

4. The trial of Jesus, according to the gospel, 
took place in the house of Caiaphas. This could 
not have happened under the authority and 
jurisdiction of the Sanhedrin, for no criminal 
case could be brought for trial outside of the 
Lischas Hagozis (the Hewn Chamber) in the 
Temple. (Tal., San., 86b, 88b; Aboda Zora, 8b; 
Maimon., San., 4: 11.) 

5. All the synoptics unite in their assertion 
that Jesus was tried at night. This, too, would 
have been a gross violation of the rules of the 
Sanhedrin. No criminal court in Judea was 
allowed to be held at night. Court sessions 
opened after the morning sacrifice and closed 
at sunset with the last evening sacrifice. (Mishna, 
San., IV: 1 ; Tal., do., 80b; Maim., San., 3:1; 
also " Legislation Criminelle du Talmud," by I. 
J. M. Rabenovitz.) 

6. One of the servants, according to the 
Biblical account, struck Jesus, while at the palace 



The trial of jesus 9 

of Caiaphas, in the presence of the judges. This 
would have been considered a great outrage 
in a Jewish court of law, and the servant would 
have been punished as a felon as he truly deserved. 
The High Priest, however, and the so-called 
judges did not even rebuke this mean coward. 
This could not have happened in a Jewish court. 



II 



Jesus Not Tried by a Jewish Court 

7. Not only were the customs and laws of 
procedure violated by the judges of Jesus, but the 
laws of Moses were ignored and transgressed. Ac- 
cording to the Synoptics, Jesus was arrested and 
tried on Passover night (Thursday, April 6th-7th). 
This was not only illegal, but absolutely wrong 
and a desecration of the festival ceremonies, for 
the following reasons: 

(a.) Two scribes had to be present at every 
trial to record the proceedings (San., 36b; Mishna, 
10:2; Maim., 1:9). Writing, however, was for- 
bidden on a festival (Tal., Sabbath, 73). 

(b.) It was considered a desecration of the day 
to hold court on a festival or a Sabbath (Mishna, 
San., IV: 1 ; Tal., do., 32b, 34a; Maim., 3:111). 

8. The criminal case could not have started 
the day before a holiday or the day before the 
Sabbath (Tal., Rosh Hashona, 25a; Maim., San., 
12:3). 

10 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS n 

9. In giving the decision, two irregularities 
were perpetrated, each of which, according to the 
Jewish law, was sufficient in itself to render the 
whole trial null and void : 

(a.) The High Priest, we read, asked the 
judges, "What think ye?" and they answered 
and said, "He is guilty of death." This pro- 
cedure could not have happened in a legitimate 
Jewish tribunal, where each judge was required 
to rise and state his opinion, and the reasons that 
led him to this conclusion. There was no voting 
"en bloc" in the Sanhedrin (Mishna, San., 4:1; 
Tal., do., 32a; Gittin, 59a; Maim., San., 10:6). 

(&.) The decision that "he is guilty of death" 
seems to have been unanimous. This could not 
have happened in the Sanhedrin. The Jewish law 
was very careful about the rights and protection of 
the accused . As there were no lawyers in the Jewish 
court, it was provided that the judges, themselves, 
after all testimony was in, should be divided into 
groups— one to look out for the interests of the 
prisoner and defend him in the discussion that 
preceded the decision, and the other to act for the 
prosecution. If, by some unforeseen combination 
of circumstances, the prisoner had no such pro- 



is the trial op jesus 

tection as the law provided, the whole proceeding 
was annulled and the prisoner set free at once. 
"If the vote is unanimous," says the Talmud, 
"the criminal goes free at once." It is further 
explained that, in such a case, it is not a trial, but 
a conspiracy. (Tal.,San., 17a; Maim., San., 9:1.) 

10. That Caiaphas and his crowd were 
ignorant of Jewish jurisprudence has already 
been shown; but that he should have been 
ignorant of the laws appertaining to his office as 
High Priest is rather surprising. By tearing his 
garments (Matthew 26:65) the High Priest not 
only transgressed the laws of festival observance 
(it was unlawful to break or tear anything on a 
holiday), but he transgressed a Biblical prohi- 
bition which absolutely forbids a High Priest 
to rend his garments on any occasion whatso- 
ever. We read in Leviticus 10:6, "And Moses 
said unto Aaron, and unto Eliazar, and unto 
Ithamar, his sons, ' Uncover not your heads, 
neither rend your clothes; lest ye die, and lest the 
wrath come upon all the people.'" The prohi- 
bition to the High Priest is made more explicit 
in Leviticus 21:10: "And he that is the High 
Priest among his brethren, upon whose head the 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 13 

anointed oil was poured, and that was conse- 
crated to put on the garments, shall not uncover 
his head nor rend his clothes." We see, then, 
that Caiaphas was ignorant of even the ceremo- 
nies pertaining to his position. Surely an igno- 
ramus of this type would not have been allowed 
by the learned Rabbis of the Sanhedrin to be 
president of their court. 

11. The Apostles seem anxious to point out 
the ignorance of the assembly whenever an 
opportunity offers itself. They state that, when 
the High Priest saw that the witnesses had all 
failed, he turned to Jesus and exhorted him to 
confess. This is a most outrageous and unheard- 
of proceeding in a Jewish court of law. No 
excuse can be given for so flagrant a violation of 
the principles of Jewish jurisprudence. There 
is a long-recognized and deep-rooted maxim in the 
Talmud, which was handed down from the San- 
hedrin, that "No man can incriminate himself.' ' 
yen lD*y WW DTK pa One's confession could 
not be used as evidence against him. (TaL, 
San., 9b, 25a; Ketuboth, 18a; Yevomoth, 25a.) 
The Apostles, by testifying to this barbaric and 
un- Jewish proceeding, exonerate the Jews and 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 



their Sanhedrin from the responsibility of the 
guilt of shedding innocent blood. It could not 
have taken place in a Jewish tribunal if legally 
constituted and authoritatively convoked. 

The best proof that the trial was illegal and 
unofficial is provided by the Apostles. In their 
testimony as to what the High Priest told Pilate 
when Jesus was brought before him, not a word 
is said as to his (the High Priest's) having men- 
tioned the proceedings of the previous night. He 
did not state that Jesus blasphemed God and 
was, therefore, condemned by the Sanhedrin, 
according to Jewish law. He simply acted the 
part of an informer, telling Pilate that Jesus 
was a rebel and, as such, deserved death. Had 
the Sanhedrin then been in existence, with the 
legal right to condemn one to death, Caiaphas 
would not have been slow in stating it. 

Another proof that the Jewish courts had been 
abolished and their laws annulled at the time of the 
trial can be found in the crucifixion of the two 
thieves in company with Jesus. This was done in 
accordance with the Roman law. The Jewish 
law provided that a thief must pay a fine equal to 
double the amount of his theft. (Exodus 22:3; 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 15 



Talmud, Baba Kamma, 62b; Mishna, do., 7:1; 
Maimon., vol. 4, " theft," 1:4.) But the Romans 
crucified thieves. This shows beyond any doubt 
that the Jewish laws were not in operation at 
that time. 

To know the identity of the so-called judges 
before whom Jesus was brought on Passover 
night, and by what authority they tried him, we 
must go to Jewish tradition and hear what is 
said on that subject. 



Ill 



The Charges Against Jesus Un- Jewish 

Another point that the New Testament leaves 

in m doubt is as to the specific charge upon which 

Jesus was condemned by the High Priest and his 

clique. Some scholars are of the opinion that 

it was his claim to the Messiahship that brought 

about his condemnation; others attribute it to 

the testimony of the witnesses to his statement 

that he could " destroy the temple of God and 

rebuild it in three days"; many believe that it 

was due to the charge that he claimed to be the 

son of God. If each charge, however, should be 

thoroughly and impartially examined, it would 

be found that none has any basis for conviction. 

In fact, all these charges are stupid, ridiculous, 

and preposterous, not one of them resting on a 

legal or religious foundation. In order to get 

a clearer idea of the charges and their absurd 

character, it would be best to quote the Biblical 

account thereof. As Matthew happens to be 

16 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 17 



the first, we will examine his account (Matt. 
26:63). "The High Priest answered and said 
unto him, ' 1 adjure thee by the living God that 
thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the son 
of God.' Jesus said unto him, ' Thou hast said. 
Nevertheless, I say unto you, hereafter shall ye 
see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of 
power and coming in the clouds of heaven.' 
Then the High Priest rent his clothes, saying, 
'He hath spoken blasphemy ; what further need 
have we for witnesses? Behold, ye have heard 
his blasphemy.' " On this accusation, it seems, 
Jesus was condemned to death. 

I claim that no legal Jewish tribunal could or 
would have condemned Jesus on these charges. 
There was nothing wrong or irreligious in this 
statement of Jesus. No scrupulous Rabbi or 
pious Jew could have taken any exception, on 
religious grounds, to what Jesus said. 

The Jews could have had no reason to dispute 
his Messiahship because Rome could be depended 
on to attend to her business and put down any 
and every rebellion that might occur. Judea 
was then a Roman province, and its citizens had 
no liking for the Emperor. Surely the Jews 



18 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 



would have been the last ones to take up the 
cause of their hated oppressors and condemn 
one who wished to free them from the Roman 
yoke. So this accusation surely could not have 
been upheld in a truly Jewish court of law. 

Equally, the second charge, that he claimed 
to be the son of God, could not have been taken 
seriously by the Sanhedrin as an offence. First, 
every Jew, according to the Bible, had the 
privilege of calling himself a son of God. Moses 
was the first to apply the name to the Children 
of Israel (Deut. 14: 1). It was customary, even 
in later days, for the prophets to call all good men 
sons of God (Isaiah 63 : 8 and 1:2; Psalms 2 : 7, 
Jeremiah 31:20; Hosea 9: 1 and 10). In Sephare 
(R6ah, 96) there is a discussion as to whether a 
bad man may also have the right to call himself 
the son of God, but the majority of the Rabbis 
gave this right to every man, because it is in the 
power of every one to improve and become worthy 
of the name. There was, therefore, no reason 
why it should have been considered wrong in 
Jesus. Caiaphas and his creatures, however, 
could least of all entertain such an accusation. 
In their presence, Jesus did not say anything 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 19 

about being the "Son of God," but called himself 
modestly, like the Prophet Ezekiel, "Son of 
man." Surely no one could find fault with this 
expression on religious grounds. Where, then, 
is the "blasphemy" that Caiaphas found? 

The third charge brought out by the witnesses 
is even more ridiculous. The statement that he 
could destroy the temple of God and rebuild it 
in three days could surely not have been con- 
sidered blasphemous, or even irreligious. Not 
every one might be disposed to credit such an 
extraordinary assertion. Some would take it in 
an allegorical sense; while others might be 
inclined to ridicule it, or consider it a joke or a 
vain boast. But, from whatever side considered, 
there was nothing blasphemous in the statement. 
No good Catholic would consider it irreligious 
if to-day a man should make the statement that 
he could destroy St. Peter's Cathedral in Rome 
and rebuild it in three days. Why, then, should 
the Jews have regarded Jesus blasphemous for 
making a like assertion concerning the Temple ? 
Jesus reverentially called it "the temple of 
God." He drove the money-changers from its 
court, so that it should not be profaned by their 



20 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 

business transactions. What more could the 
most scrupulous Pharisee expect of him ? Surely 
a Jewish court of law, legally constituted, could 
not have condemned Jesus on any of these charges. 
Here again we are left in the dark, and cannot 
know the true basis for Jesus' condemnation 
without Jewish tradition. 



IV 



Pilate, the Spaniard 

Another important point that the Apostles do 
not bring out specifically is the true attitude of 
the Roman Governor, Pontius Pilate. From the 
accounts given in the New Testament, a super- 
ficial observer would construe that Pilate was 
anxious to save Jesus from death, but that the 
people, instigated by the High Priest, would not 
allow him to exercise his rightful duty. This 
construction, however, has many objections to it. 

First, he was the representative of the Emperor 
who was to dispense justice and equity in his 
realm, and Rome would have upheld her servant 
who acted courageously in the cause of justice. 

Secondly, the character attributed to the 
Governor by the New-Testament writers, as 
timorous and vacillating, does not correspond 
with the description given of him by contem- 
porary secular writers, all of whom unite in pro- 
claiming him brutal, tyrannical, and inhuman. 



22 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 

(Petrucelli Delia Cottina, "Memorie de Giudea," 
vol. i, chap. 2; Josephus, A. J., 18:3; B. J., Book 
2, chap. 9, par. 2; Luke 13:1; Philo Legatione ad 
Caium, M. 2.) That a tyrant like him should 
hesitate to crucify one whom he considered a 
mere Jew is rather incomprehensible. 

Thirdly, the bare Biblical narrative sounds 
rather strange to an unbiassed reader. Pilate, 
we are told, asked Jesus, "Art thou the King of 
the Jews?" which question Jesus answered in 
the affirmative; whereupon Pilate came out to 
the Jews and said, "I find no fault with him." 
(Luke 23:3.) This is, indeed, surprising. Jesus 
admits to the representative of Caesar, who is 
King of Judea as well as of Rome, that he 
(Jesus) is the King of the Jews and, hence, a 
rebel against the Emperor. Yet Pilate declares 
immediately afterward that he finds no fault 
with him. As far as dominion was concerned, 
Caesar was then the only king of the Jews, and 
no one else could have arrogated to himself the 
right to this title without special permission from 
the Emperor. 

For the sake of argument, let us suppose that 
the brutal, spiteful, all-powerful representative 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 23 

of the Emperor was really anxious to save Jesus, 
but was afraid of the rabble. There were means 
at hand by which he could have saved the innocent 
prisoner without exciting the anger of the mob. 
His official residence was not at Jerusalem, but 
at Caesarea; and his visits to the Holy City were 
rare and his stays of short duration. Both court 
and forum were at Caesarea, the residential city 
of the governors of Judea. By postponing the 
case and sending Jesus to Caesarea, where court 
was held regularly, the life of the innocent 
prisoner could have been saved (Acts 23). Or, 
he could have sent him to his superior, the 
Governor of Syria, who would surely not have 
acted so cowardly. He did nothing of the kind, 
although he had full power to do it. He seemed 
to have been in a hurry to commit the murderous 
act on that very day. He even allowed his sol- 
diers to abuse and torture the prisoner. In that 
dastardly brutality peculiar to his Spanish blood, 
he scourged the helpless and innocent prisoner. 
If he could do nothing else for Jesus, surely he 
should, at least, have spared him the disgrace 
of crucifixion, which was considered the most 
terrible form of execution. Only slaves, thieves, 



24 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 

and low-born rebels were crucified. He could 
have chosen for him an easier and nobler death, 
if executed he must be. 

It is also impossible to understand to whom 
Matthew refers when he says (Matt. 27:19), 
"His wife sent him word, saying, 'Have thou 
nothing • to do with that just man.'" We can- 
not know whom the writer has in mind. It 
could not refer to Pilate's legal wife, Claudia, 
whom he married in Rome before he left for 
Judea; because she was not allowed to go to 
Palestine with her husband. At the time of the 
trial, she was still in Rome, basking in the sun- 
shine of Emperor Tiberius. (See the above 
Petrucelli Delia Cottina, vol. 1, chap. 2.) We 
are told by the Apostles, also, that the people 
were unanimous in their cry, "Crucify him! 
Crucify him!" Here, again, it is impossible to 
know to whom the writers refer. It could not 
have been the Jews who demanded the crucifixion 
of Jesus, for: 

(a.) Crucifixion was not a Jewish mode of 
execution, but Roman. (See "The Trial of 
Jesus," by Giovanni Rosadi, chap. 15.) They 
hated all foreign customs, but, more than any 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 25 

others, the barbaric modes of execution practised 
by the Romans. Besides, the crucifixion re- 
minded them of their lowly state, that they were 
treated as slaves by their conquerors. It also 
reminded them of the execution of their dearly 
beloved Prince, Antigonus, the last of the noble 
Maccabean dynasty, who was crucified by the 
tyrannical Anthony, in order to degrade the Jews. 
Surely no self-respecting, pious Jew could have 
invoked this kind of execution at the hand of the 
hated Roman, on one whom they must have 
considered at that time a brother Jew. 

(b.) Only a few days before, the Jews had 
received Jesus near the gate at Jerusalem with 
palm branches, triumphantly shouting their 
hosannas, and with music (Matt. 21:8; Mark 
11:8; John 12:20). Nothing had happened in 
the mean time that could have turned the hearts 
of all the people away from Jesus. How could 
the same people who shouted "Hosanna!" a few 
days before, now call for the crucifixion of this 
popular idol? It is not natural nor possible. 

(c.) The Jews seemed to have remained his 
faithful friends and followers to the end, for we 
read (Luke 23:27) that, when he was led to 



26 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 



Golgotha, " there followed him a great company 
of people and women which also bewailed and 
lamented. ,, The Jews, then, bewailed and la- 
mented his fate. Why did they cry, "Crucify 
him, crucify him!" an hour before? 

What seems to be even more extraordinary is 
the fact that Pilate, after washing his hands in 
water, making only a mockery of an old Jew- 
ish custom, as a sign that he believed the pris- 
oner innocent, and that he had nothing to do 
with shedding his innocent blood, unexpectedly 
changes his mind and signs his name to a false 
statement, labelling Jesus as "King of the Jews" 
and thus making him a rebel to Rome. By this 
label, Pilate admitted the truth of the charge, 
and by taking the responsibility on himself he 
exonerated the accusers. 

In the Apostles' Creed, indorsed by most of 
the Christian churches, which is admitted to be 
the oldest legacy of Christianity, we find again 
Pilate alone blamed for the shedding of the 
innocent blood, while the Jews are not even 
mentioned. The Apostles' Creed in question 
reads as follows: "I believe in God, the Father 
Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth; and in 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 27 

Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord; who was 
conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin 
Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, 
died, and buried," etc. Why are the Jews not 
mentioned if they were really concerned in his 
sufferings ? The Roman historian Tacitus places 
the whole responsibility on the Governor. In 
his Annals (XV. 44) he states: " Jesus, called 
Christ, was crucified by Pilate for promoting a 
rebellion among the Jews." Tacitus undoubtedly 
had before him the original records, and, there- 
fore, was able to place the responsibility at the 
door of the real perpetrator. How, then, can we 
reconcile the Biblical account with the above 
seeming contradictions, unless we throw more 
light on the subject ? Only the Jewish traditions 
can solve the difficulty. They, alone, can show 
the true interpretation of the New Testament nar- 
rative and prove its truth. They not only cor- 
roborate the words of the Apostles, but even 
force upon us the conviction that the New Testa- 
ment must have been written very soon after the 
crucifixion. 



V 



Pilate in His True Light 

In order to state what the Jewish sources 

have to say on the events leading up to the trial, 

it will be necessary to start with the appointment 

of Pilate as Proconsul of Judea. It was, indeed, 

an evil day for Palestine when the cruel Spaniard, 

Pontius Pilate, was appointed Proconsul of the 

Judean province. That his appointment was 

dictated by Sejanus, the evil genius of Tiberius, 

was only the more calculated to terrify the minds 

of the inhabitants of that terror-stricken country. 

According to Josephus and Philo, Pilate came 

with the avowed intention of stamping out every 

vestige of freedom that might still have been 

dormant in the hearts of the Judeans. In order 

to accomplish this design, he was even ready to 

provoke a rebellion among the Jews, as this 

would have given him the desired pretext to carry 

out his scheme of crushing them beneath his iron 

heel. Besides, he had hopes of honor and glory 

28 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 29 

to be bestowed upon him by the Emperor, who, 
like himself, hated the Jews. He,, therefore, 
determined to do all he could to outrage the 
religious feelings of the people ; the most vulner- 
able point in the Jewish armor. This mean 
policy he revealed upon his first entrance into 
office. 

Up to that time the Roman governors, in 
order not to offend the Jewish susceptibilities, 
had ordered the legions to remove all idolatrous 
and immoral images from their standards, pre- 
vious to their entering the Holy City; Pilate, with 
his cruel scheme in mind, changed this custom 
and issued an order to his soldiers stationed at 
Jerusalem to restore the offensive insignia to their 
standards (Josephus, A. J., XVIII. 9; Philo, Lega- 
tio ad Caium, M. 2, P. 290; " Jewish History," 
Graetz, vol. 2, ch. 5 ; " Jewish Ency.," vol. 10, Pilate ; 
Schiirer, "Jewish People in the Time of Christ," 
First Div., vol. 2). 

When the Jews of Jerusalem beheld these 
idolatrous insignia and the immoral images float- 
ing over the palace of Herod, they were filled with 
consternation. It was a breach of the promise 
which Pompey made to the Jews on his entrance 



3 o THE TRIAL OF JESUS 

to Jerusalem. The Jewish leaders were, there- 
fore, not slow to interpret the true significance of 
this, the new Governor's move. They, therefore, 
decided to act cautiously and with calmness, 
though firmly. 

An imposing delegation of ten thousand men 
was elected and despatched to Caesarea, where 
the Governor resided, to plead with him for the 
removal of those immoral images from the Holy 
City. In order to incense the Jews beyond 
endurance, Pilate refused to receive the delega- 
tion and ordered them to return forthwith to 
Jerusalem. He, however, did not count on the 
Jewish stubbornness and persistency. The dele- 
gates sent word back to the Governor that they 
would not leave Caesarea until he gave them 
audience and heard their arguments. For five 
days they besieged the gate of his palace, clamor- 
ing for admittance. 

This incensed Pilate so much that he decided 
to take drastic measures. He ordered two 
legions of his soldiers to surround the dele- 
gates and, at his given signal, to fall upon them 
and kill every one of them. Mounting on the 
platform in front of the palace, he harangued 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 31 

the delegates and, in an abusive speech, in- 
formed them that he would not receive them; 
but admonished them that, if they did not leave 
the palace gate forthwith, they should perish 
by the sword. To this the imperturbable dele- 
gates answered that they were there representing 
the Jewish people and their religion, and that 
they would not be turned away by threats. If 
need be they were willing to perish for their faith. 
Angered by this bold reply, he gave the signal to 
his soldiers to fall upon the delegates and butcher 
them to a man. To his and the Roman soldiers' 
surprise, the Jews, when they saw the legions 
approaching and realized their precarious posi- 
tion, instead of being thrown into confusion and 
disorder and seeking refuge in flight, rather 
threw down, to a man, all their weapons and 
armor, and, folding their arms on their breast, 
cried out with one voice that they were happy to 
die for the religion of their fathers; moreover, 
they would not even defend themselves against 
their slayers. This unheard-of daring staggered 
even the enemy. The Romans, accustomed to 
fight opposing foes, were abashed by the bravery 
and recklessness manifested, and felt disdainful 



32 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 

to fall upon an unresisting and defenceless crowd, 
and commit cold-blooded butchery. The troops, 
therefore, refused to execute the Governor's 
orders, and joined the Jews in petitioning him to 
repeal his offensive decree. Pilate was forced to 
yield, and ordered the removal of the idolatrous 
insignia from the standards at Jerusalem. (See 
Josephus, A. J., XVIII. 9; Philo, Legatio, M. 2; 
Graetz " Jewish History," Vol. 2, Ch. 5; "Jewish 
Ency.," Vol. 10, Pilate; Schiirer's "Time of Jesus 
Christ," Div. 1, Vol. 2.) 



VI 



" Render Unto Cesar the Things which are 
Cesar's " 

This defeat at the hands of the hated Jews, 
however, only embittered Pilate the more against 
them, and urged him the more to deeds of violence. 
To give vent to his feelings, he irritated and pro- 
voked the Jews at every opportunity. His chief 
aim, however, was to foment trouble among 
them, so as to force the Judeans into open rebel- 
lion against Rome, an event which would give 
him an opportunity to wreak his vengeance upon 
them. He soon succeeded in finding a scheme 
calculated to arouse the Jews to violent opposi- 
tion, and enrich his own pocket, besides. 

Knowing the poor condition of Judea and the 
heavy taxes the people had to pay, he determined 
to make their burdens even heavier. He, there- 
fore, levied a new tax upon the people, which was 
not only impossible to bear, but absolutely far 
beyond their means to pay. The collection of 

33 



34 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 

these taxes was accompanied with the greatest 
cruelty and the most barbarous outrages. The 
people grew sullen and desperate; all felt bitter 
against Rome and her tyrannical Governor. 
Agitators now made their appearance, advising 
open rebellion and the non-payment of taxes. 
The country was slowly approaching the brink of 
revolution, drifting helplessly toward the goal to 
which Pilate was driving it. 

It was at this time that the peaceful and sub- 
lime Galilean Teacher made his appearance. 
His fame as a man of wonders and as one of 
miracle-working powers had spread all over the 
land. The people were thrilled with delight 
and high expectation. Judea needed a leader 
who could unite and consolidate the nation, which 
was then being torn by different sects and parties. 
Jesus seemed to possess all the attributes of a 
successful leader. The Jewish idea of leadership 
demanded a strong spiritual personality. The 
spirituality of Jesus had been heard of all over 
the country. He was possessed of a deeply 
religious spirit that permeated all who came in 
contact with him. His soul embraced all man- 
kind in love and devotion. His habit of travel- 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 35 



ling from place to place to preach the word of God 
brought him in contact with the great mass of the 
people, and endeared him to them all; while his 
healing powers proclaimed him a saint and 
prophet. 

It was therefore natural that in their distress 
his brethren should turn to him for advice and 
guidance. A messenger was sent to Jesus to ask 
what the people of Judea, in their present crisis, 
should do — whether they should cease to pay 
taxes or not. Jesus, in his inimitable way, 
asked the messenger to show him a coin. When 
he asked whose image was engraved on it, the 
astonished messenger was obliged to admit that 
it was the figure of Caesar. "If so," Jesus 
answered, "render unto Caesar the things which 
are Caesar's." The words bore a deep signifi- 
cance for the Jews all over the country. Their 
attention was called to the fact that they were 
neither able nor prepared to cope with the most 
powerful empire of the world, for even their cur- 
rency belonged to Caesar. All thought of open 
violence was therefore abandoned; agitation 
ceased and quiet was restored. But this was 
for only a short time. 



VII 



Caiaphas a Roman Spy 

The scheming Governor, Pilate, was far from 
satisfied by this peaceful turn of events. He 
wanted war, and war he must have. He there- 
fore determined to follow up this measure by 
others more oppressive and outrageous. Robbing 
and pillaging the country without let or hindrance 
was not sufficient to bring about rebellion. He 
determined upon despoiling the Temple and 
robbing the holy sanctuary of its treasure. As 
this outrage would have been considered a sacri- 
legious act, even in the eyes of the Greeks and 
Romans, he decided to resort to trickery and sub- 
terfuge. 

It was not very difficult for him to find an 
excuse for committing this crime, as Caiaphas, 
the High Priest, was his bounden slave and accom- 
plice. Caiaphas was more a Roman than a Jew, 
more a spy than a High Priest, and, altogether, a 

mean arid contemptible character. (Yoma, 9a and 

36 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 37 



35b.) The office of High Priest was no longer 
the exalted and honorable position to which 
the best man and noblest Jew was elected. King 
Herod, the Idumean usurper, had degraded it to 
a low position. He sold the office at auction to 
the highest bidder (Josephus, A. J., 15:20 and 
XX. 10), and, as no respectable Jew or priest 
cared to take this position by such low means, the 
office fell into the hands of vile, obscure, and con- 
temptible creatures, who rather degraded the office 
than honored themselves. (Talmud, Pes., 57a; 
Yoma, 9a; Jos., A., XX. 8.) After the death of 
Herod, when, through his treacherous will, Judea 
fell into the hands of Rome, the office of High 
Priest was even more degraded by becoming a 
secret-service bureau of Rome. Every one that 
aspired to the office had to become a Roman spy, 
to watch and report the intentions and plans of 
the Judeans. Hannas, the son of Seth, one of 
Herod's creatures, saw his chance and, without 
hesitation or scruple, took the office under the 
condition offered to him. In vain did the Jews 
try, later, to wrest it from him. The Romans 
found him a good tool and a faithful spy. No 
traitor, however, served the enemies of his 



38 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 



country with more cringing servility than did his 
son-in-law, Caiaphas. No law was too holy for 
violation by him; no act too mean for him, in 
order to please his masters, the Roman gov- 
ernors. It was he who revealed to Pilate 
the existence of the sacred treasury, and it 
was through his aid that Pilate secured it by 
means of an intrigue. Caiaphas, to the surprise 
of the people at Jerusalem, unexpectedly became 
a public-spirited man and urged on the Governor 
the necessity of an aqueduct which would bring 
water into the Holy City. As no one suspected 
anything in this proposition, it was received very 
favorably by the people. The only objection to 
it was the lack of funds and the impossibility of 
taxing the people with a new levy. They could 
not bear the heavy burdens already laid upon 
them, and how could they think of any new 
expenditure? To this objection the High Priest 
answered that the construction of the aqueduct 
would be in the hands of the Governor, and he 
would surely find a sourceior the necessary funds. 
Shortly afterward, Pilate arrived at Jerusalem 
with a large army and ordered Caiaphas to 
deliver to him the Temple treasury, which was 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 39 

used only for the purpose of buying sacrifices, 
and for other sacred purposes. While the Jews 
were horrified at this outrageous sacrilege, the 
High Priest spitefully announced that it was 
permissible to use the "Korban" fund for the 
improvement of the city. In vain did the Jews 
protest that Caiaphas was not their elected 
High Priest and therefore could not speak in 
their name. The Temple was robbed of its 
treasure, and all the valuable vessels it possessed 
were turned over to the avaricious and cruel 
Governor of Rome. Now were the Judeans out- 
raged indeed. They could suffer persecution in 
silence; could endure oppressive measures when 
directed against themselves; but when their 
religion was assailed, when their Temple was 
desecrated, they could bear it no longer. Their 
patience exhausted, they determined, come what 
may, to resist forcibly the tyranny of Pilate and 
break openly with their cruel oppressors. They 
were now fully resolved to embark upon the dan- 
gerous route that leads to revolution, and were but 
awaiting the word of their spiritual leader when 
hostilities should begin. 
Again Jesus came forth as the great pacifier; 



4 o THE TRIAL OF JESUS 

once again he raised his voice bespeaking patience 
and endurance; once more he strove to save his 
country from the inevitable ruin that would be 
its doom if the Jews rebelled. He now came 
with a new policy. Revolution and bloodshed 
were abhorrent to him; and, besides, Pilate and 
Rome were too powerful for weak, impoverished 
Judea. The people could be helped, however, 
by a change of their leaders. The country needed 
better men at the head of affairs. The High 
Priest must be an honest man and a true, patri- 
otic Jew, who would not pander to the wishes 
of the Roman governors. Caiaphas, he claimed, 
was as much to blame for the desecration of the 
Temple as the despotic Pilate. The fire of 
attack, Jesus advised, should, therefore, be 
directed against their treacherous High Priest, 
the ally and spy of the Romans. As Pilate 
would not receive any complaints against his 
minion, Jesus urged that the people hold a large 
and peaceful demonstration in front of the 
Temple to express their protest against the base- 
ness and treachery of Caiaphas, so that the world 
should know the truth. 



VIII 



"The Galileans, Whose Blood Pilate 
Mingled with Sacrifices' ' 

When Pilate was informed by his spies of this 
move — of this contemplated attack upon his 
favorite — he determined to defeat its object by 
fair or foul means. With his characteristic 
cruelty, he took the course most in keeping with 
his cowardly and despicable nature. First, he 
designed to turn this peaceful demonstration 
into a riot by provoking and enraging the populace 
beyond endurance. This would give him the 
opportunity he so long sought for, and provide 
him with an excuse for slaughter and bloodshed. 

Later, however, he learned that the leaders of 
the procession, instructed by Jesus, had admon- 
ished the people against carrying arms on that 
day, so that no amount of provocation would 
bring about a disturbance or riot. Informed of 
this precaution, the blood-thirsty Governor or- 
dered ten legions of soldiers to disguise themselves 

41 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 



in citizens' apparel and mingle with the demonstra- 
tors. No sooner had the procession started from 
the gates of the Temple than the Roman soldiers, 
at a prearranged signal, fell upon the defenceless 
and unarmed Jews, butchering them in cold blood. 
Twenty thousand Jews were slain on that day, 
and many times that number were wounded and 
injured. It was of this occasion that the Bible 
says " there were present at that season some 
that told him of the Galileans, whose blood Pilate 
had mingled with their sacrifices." (Luke 13: i; 
Josephus, A. J., 18:3; "Jewish History," Graetz, 
Vol. 2, ch. V.; "Jewish Ency.," v. 10.) 

This last unspeakable treachery of Pilate 
caused the Jews to gasp in horror. It forced them 
to recoil at the thought of more bloodshed for the 
present. Their spirit, however, had not been 
broken, but rather their power of endurance 
was becoming exhausted. But they perceived 
clearly that Pilate was purposely driving them 
into rebellion. They determined to accept the 
challenge, come what might, and die in the 
attempt, knowing themselves to be no match 
for all-powerful Rome. Death was more welcome 
to them than a life so miserable and wretched. 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 



Furthermore, Jewish fatalism and belief in miracles 
urged them to trust in God and fear no evil. 

The Governor, as if desirous of pouring oil on 
this smouldering fire, again disclosed his bloody 
hand. Knowing from experience how obnoxious 
the idolatrous images were to the people, he again 
ordered those idolatrous standards to be placed 
over the palace of Herod, which overlooked the 
Temple. 

As Pilate foresaw, all calculations and re- 
straints were now thrown to the winds; the Jews 
saw that he was forcing them to break openly 
with Rome, but they cared nothing for conse- 
quences. Their freedom was crushed, their lives 
were not safe, and their religion — the breath of 
their nostrils — was being daily desecrated. They 
could stand it no longer. All they now wanted 
was a brave leader, who would marshal their 
forces to liberty or death. But where was their 
leader in this, their greatest hour of need ? Where 
was their universally acclaimed Messiah? He 
was wandering from city to city, and from place 
to place. He was proclaiming everywhere the 
approaching Kingdom of Heaven, and the coming 
glory of God. 



THE TRIAL OF. JESUS 



The cry of the people reached him at a far dis- 
tance, and once again he raised his voice in the 
cause of peace and submission. "If thine enemy 
smite thee on the right cheek, give him also the 
left to smite." Once again he admonished the 
people against violence and rebellion. His words 
of submission were accompanied by a wonderful 
and ingenious advice. "Send an embassy to 
Rome to make complaint against Pilate before 
the Emperor." (" Jewish Ency.," vol. 10, Pilate.) 
It was a superb stroke of genius, and as unex- 
pected as extraordinary. The attention of the 
people was, by this means, drawn to the fact that 
Pilate was not Emperor, but that there were 
higher authorities at Rome whose hearts were 
not set against the Jews. Why, indeed, resort 
to violent measures while there was still hope of 
alleviating their suffering by peaceful means? 
The people again listened to his voice, and once 
more they determined to follow his suggestion. 



IX 



Pilate Surrenders to Jesus 

When Pilate heard of the advice of Jesus, his 
horror knew no bounds. He feared that the 
recital of the wrongs suffered by the Jews under 
his administration would enrage Tiberius against 
him. He feared that his sacrilegious and bar- 
barous acts would be too much for even Tiberius 
to condone. He resolved upon a change of 
policy — to yield to the demands of the people and 
propitiate them so far as to prevail upon them 
not to send this embassy. Accordingly, he sent 
word to the people of Jerusalem that he was willing 
to hear their complaints and to alleviate their 
grievances. It was a complete surrender on his 
part, for a great fear took hold of him which 
entirely unnerved him. There was joy and 
gladness in the Holy City when the message of 
the Governor arrived. They perceived now the 
wisdom of their meek and peaceful leader. 
Without a drop of bloodshed, without the least 

45 



46 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 



violence, he had defeated the haughty tyrant and 
forced him to yield to the demands of the Jews. 
Anxiously they were now awaiting the arrival of 
Jesus at Jerusalem, that he might go as their 
representative to Caesarea, there to present their 
demands before the Governor. 

There were many people, however, who were 
not in accord with the peaceful attitude of Jesus. 
The Zealots (radicals) had been secretly making 
preparations for a revolution, and their plans were 
all completed. They intended to break openly 
with Rome on the week before the Passover, when 
many pilgrims would be sure to join the ranks of 
the revolutionists. Naturally, they were dis- 
pleased with the turn affairs had taken. The 
mass of the people, however, were inclined to 
follow the advice of their master. Consequently, 
the Zealots were forced to postpone their plans 
until after the meeting of Jesus and Pilate, which 
conference, it was thought, would take place on 
Sunday, April 9th. If the interview should fail, 
as they hoped and expected, they would then be 
in a position to convince the people that there 
was nothing left for them save revolution. They 
could then point out that all peaceful means had 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 47 

been exhausted, and that their only resort now 
must be to force of arms. Sunday, the third 
day of Passover, was looked upon by them as 
the day upon which the freedom of Judea should 
be acclaimed. 



X 



The Conspiracy of the High Priest 

Meantime, Jesus was nearing Jerusalem, but 
the greater number of the people were ignorant 
of his whereabouts, as he kept his movements 
secret. However, many knew of his approach 
and went to meet him without the city with great 
joy and shouts of triumph; with palm branches 
and hosannas. As soon as he entered the city, 
Jesus repaired to the Temple, where he wished 
to address the people. There he was angered 
to find the Temple court converted into a market- 
place by the money-changers, who profaned the 
place by their shouting and calling for trade. 
That money-changers were allowed to sit in the 
Temple court was due to the cupidity of Caiaphas, 
who received great revenue by selling the seats 
to these people. (J. Peah, 6:1.) The Jews 
were enraged at the action of Caiaphas in 
allowing this desecration of the Temple, but 

could do nothing against the minion of the Gov- 

48 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 



ernor. Jesus, seeing this sacrilegious innova- 
tion, was very indignant, threw down the tables, 
and drove the money-changers from the court. 
Caiaphas became enraged at this insult offered 
to him by Jesus. He regarded it as a usurpation 
of power, for he alone had entire charge of the 
Temple. However, he was compelled to hold 
his peace out of "fear of the people," and also 
because he knew not what Pilate's intentions 
were. In his heart, Caiaphas was harboring evil 
designs against the favorite and leader of the 
people. He strongly suspected that one of Jesus' 
demands upon Pilate would be the removal of the 
High Priest. Accordingly, he felt himself called 
upon to act in his own defence and thwart the 
plans of Jesus, even if this course should bring 
misery upon the entire Jewish nation. He sent 
word to Pilate to come quickly to Jerusalem with 
a strong force and arrest Jesus in the Temple. 
The people, he said, would not allow the soldiers 
to arrest their favorite, and a riot would ensue. 
This would give him the opportunity of reporting 
to the Emperor that the Jews were a rebellious 
people, and that their leader, Jesus, had caused 
a riot in the Temple. If this plan succeeded, 



So THE TRIAL OF JESUS 

Pilate would have no cause to fear a Jewish 
embassy, for the Emperor would refuse to receive 
complaints from a rebellious nation. 

Jesus learned of this dastardly plan and deter- 
mined to avert riot and bloodshed at any cost. 
He, therefore, quietly left the Holy City late at 
night after the Paschal Supper, and went to the 
Mount of Olives, only his disciples accompanying 
him; and even they knew not the cause of this 
extraordinary measure. 

When the spies of Caiaphas informed him of 
Jesus' departure from the city immediately after 
supper, he was dumfounded. His plans had 
miscarried and he must now pay the penalty. 
He knew that Pilate would not order the arrest 
of Jesus, if it would not lead to a riot. Indeed, 
the Governor would now turn against the High 
Priest and make him a scape-goat to propitiate 
the Jews, throwing the entire blame on Caiaphas. 
There was only one course left for him now — he 
must prevent Jesus' becoming the delegate of 
the people to confer with Pilate. But how could 
he accomplish this? How could he dissuade 
the Jews from selecting their beloved and won- 
derful leader? If the Jews should but find some 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 51 

fault with the personality of Jesus, or with his 
religious teachings, they would repudiate his 
leadership, even at the last moment. Chance 
played into his hands. Unfortunately for the 
Jews, " Satan entered into one of the disciples " 
and he was willing to become a tool in the hands 
of Caiaphas to betray his Master and testify 
falsely against him before the people. Judas 
undertook to prove that Jesus' teachings were 
opposed to the laws of Moses, and also that he 
had spoken blasphemous w r ords to his disciples. 
The traitor also revealed to Caiaphas the hiding 
place of Jesus and how he could be captured. 
The High Priest was elated over this happy acci- 
dent and determined to take advantage of it. In 
fact, it would now result better than he had 
originally planned. There w^as no longer need 
that he take the life of his enemy, which act would 
have bestowed upon Jesus the crown of martyr- 
dom, the highest glory in Isreal. He would 
rather stab his reputation by calumny and evil 
report. 

However, Jesus at large was more than a 
match for all his enemies, and the Jews had only 
to look into his noble, spiritual face to be 



52 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 

convinced of the falsity of the accusations brought 
against him. Furthermore, Pilate, on hearing of the 
escape of Jesus, might vent his anger on Caiaphas. 
The High Priest, therefore, resolved to capture 
Jesus and detain him in his palace until his own 
plans matured. In order to conceal the identity 
of Jesus' captor and the manner in which the 
deed was accomplished, it was arranged that 
Judas, the supposed friend and chief disciple, 
should lead the captors in order to disarm sus- 
picion. Nay, even Jesus himself must be de- 
ceived. Judas would come to his master as a 
friend and tell him that the people of Jerusalem, 
hearing of his departure, had sent him, the 
trusted disciple, to bring back their master. 



XI 



Jesus Falsely Accused ofJIdolatry 

Everything succeeded beyond expectation. 
While Jesus himself was not deceived by the kiss 
and the friendly words, nevertheless a few of the 
disciples were, and those who became suspicious 
and wished to prevent Judas from capturing their 
master were prevented by Jesus from doing 
violent deeds. Jesus himself exerted his influ- 
ence to avoid riot; and peaceably and quietly he 
was brought to the house of Caiaphas, where he 
was to be detained for a few days. Caiaphas and 
his conspirators, elated over their success, retired 
to another room to deliberate upon their further 
plan of action. Judas was to be the chief adviser 
and counsellor — but where was he? He had 
been with the conspirators and servants during 
the capture, but no sign of him was now to be 
found. It was as if the earth had opened and 
swallowed him. In vain were messengers de- 
spatched in every direction in quest of him, but 

53 



54 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 

he was nowhere to be found. What was to be 
done? Their only prop and support had dis- 
appeared, and all their work was in vain. They 
soon heard that Judas had deserted them, and 
were informed by one who saw him last that the 
mild rebuke of Jesus, "Betrayest thou the Son 
of Man with a kiss?" had pierced him to the 
heart, and that he had repented his deed. What 
was now to be done ? Had they worked, schemed, 
and intrigued only to fail in the end? Jesus 
now became even more dangerous than before. 
Caiaphas was now forced to go on with his 
treacherous plans, no matter what the conse- 
quences were. It was too late to retreat. They 
had burned the bridges behind them and were 
compelled to proceed with their schemes. 

Caiaphas and his clique mustered their strength 
to see where they stood and what they could say 
against Jesus in denouncing him to the people. 
All kinds of testimony were heard against the 
prisoner, but nothing important was brought out, 
and once more their endeavor proved unsuccess- 
ful. Finally, some one said that he had heard 
Jesus say that "he could destroy the Temple of 
God and rebuild it in three days." As the entire 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 55 

testimony against Jesus was composed of non- 
sensical statements, this witness, also, was 
patiently heard. The High Priest, chagrined by 
his failure, asked Jesus what he meant by this 
statement. A thought occurred to him that the 
statement referred to himself (Caiaphas) — that 
he, as the representative of the Temple, should 
be destroyed and some one else take his place 
within three days. His suspicion that Jesus 
intended to ask for his removal was now con- 
firmed, but he was too astute a politician to admit, 
even in the presence of his confederates, that he 
feared for his own safety. Therefore, he at- 
tempted to explain it otherwise. His spies had 
kept him informed of everything that was being 
done at Jerusalem, and hence he was aware of 
the intentions of the Zealots to raise the standard 
of revolution, should the meeting of the following 
Sunday prove a failure. If he could but connect 
this statement concerning the destruction of the 
Temple and its rebuilding in three days with the 
plans of the Zealots, then might he accuse Jesus 
of being a rebel. "I adjure thee by the living 
God," Caiaphas then said, "that thou tell us 
whether thou be the Christ, the son of God." 



56 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 

Jesus showed his contempt for Caiaphas by con- 
tinued silence, not caring to reply to the question. 
But the last hypocritical words coming from the 
mouth of this contemptible creature, whom the 
Jews justly accused of being a spy, required 
some answer. Jesus could have shown him that 
he saw through him, but that would have been 
too much honor for Caiaphas. He therefore 
answered bluntly, "I say unto you, hereafter shall 
ye see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand 
of power and coming in a cloud of heaven." 
Caiaphas regarded this as a threat and a confirma- 
tion of his suspicion in regard to himself. He 
took it that Jesus meant that very soon he (Jesus) 
would be at the right hand of the Governor; 
that the Jews would choose him as delegate to 
Pilate to formulate their demands. He saw a 
chance, however, to misinterpret the words. The 
word, "power," in Aramaic dialect (wroaa) 
can be taken in two ways, one literal and the 
other symbolical for deity. The Jews were much 
disturbed, and horrified at the Roman Emperors 
and Governors for delegating to themselves the 
name of deity. Therefore, it was considered a 
great sin and blasphemy for a Jew to allude to 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 57 



the Emperor, or to the Governor, by that term. 
The High Priest now sought to accuse Jesus of 
blasphemy, in alluding to Pilate as "the Power," 
interpreting it to mean deity. He therefore 
called out triumphantly: "He has spoken blas- 
phemy; what further need have we of witnesses? 
Behold, now, ye have heard his blasphemy.' 9 It 
was a manufactured charge, without foundation, 
but they now had an excuse to denounce him 
before the people as an apostate and a believer 
in idol worship. With this accusation as a basis, 
they decided to denounce him on the morrow in 
the presence of all the people in the Temple. 
The Jews would surely repudiate the leadership 
of an idol-worshipper, and, perhaps, elect their 
High Priest as their delegate to the Governor. 
Early in the morning, however, Caiaphas per- 
ceived the weakness of his accusations. Who 
would believe that the proph;! of Nazareth, the 
wonder-working saint, to be an idol-worhsipper ? 
Every one would laugh at this charge, especially 
if Jesus had an opportunity to speak in his own 
behalf. They knew his power over the people, 
and his wonderful eloquence. He, therefore, 
hurriedly called another meeting of his followers, 



58 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 

who were soon convinced that they could not 
alienate the love of the Jews from their beloved 
leader by such trashy accusations. But what 
was to be done ? They now determined to resort 
to their first intention of accusing him of being a 
rebel, and to deliver him into the hands of Pilate, 
who they knew would be glad to get Jesus out of 
the way, for he would then no more need fear 
the embassy to Rome. 



XII 



The Jews Betrayed on all Sides 

When the Jews came to the Temple for the 
festival morning services, they were horrified to 
hear the conflicting reports concerning their 
leader. The disciples, John and Peter especially, 
told every one what they knew. The High-Priest 
clique, however, were not idle, for they were busy 
spreading false rumors about Jesus. They de- 
clared that he had gone to the house of the Gov- 
ernor, where he was to dine on that day. This 
was considered a sin at that time, for it was a 
violation of the Jewish law to eat leavened, bread 
on Passover. The traitors also accused Jesus of 
being the friend and spy of Pilate, and declared 
that he therefore always advised the Jews to 
yield to Pilate's extortionate demands. These 
and many other charges were hurled at Jesus in 
his absence, to pacify the people's anger toward 
Caiaphas. 

While the Jews were still in the Temple, not 
59 



60 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 

knowing what had become of their leader, a mock 
trial was being held before Pilate. That official 
was very much disappointed when he learned 
that the arrest of Jesus had not caused a riot. 
He had no excuse to offer for his cruelty to the 
people and therefore decided to keep to his pre- 
vious plan of propitiating the Jews. While he 
was anxious to get Jesus out of the way, he also 
resolved to play the part of friend to the Jews and 
to their leader. In accordance with this plan, 
the judgment hall was surrounded by Herodians 
and Idumeans — friends of Caiaphas — who were 
to demand the crucifixion of Jesus as a rebel, in 
order to make it appear that Pilate was not in 
the conspiracy. 

On leaving the Temple with hearts full of bitter- 
ness and doubt, the Jews, of course, knew nothing 
of what was being transacted in the judgment 
hall. They heard only that Pilate had arrived 
with a strong force, and that Jesus had gone up 
to see him. Suddenly they saw a large Roman 
cavalcade leading their beloved master to Golgo- 
tha with a cross upon his shoulders. Weak and 
impotent as they were, they could only shriek 
with agony, cry, bewail and lament (Luke 23:27). 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 61 



" Daughters of Jerusalem," said the meek and 
tortured sufferer, "weep not for me, but for your- 
selves and for your children; for, behold, the days 
are coming in which they will say, ' Blessed are 
the barren and the wombs that never bore, and 
the paps that never gave suck.' Then shall they 
say to the mountains, 'Fall on us,' and to the 
hills, 'Cover us.' For, if they do these things 
in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry?" 
(Ibid.) In all his great misery and suffering, 
Jesus was not thinking of himself and of his own 
torture, but of his people as sheep now left at the 
mercy of the wolves and wild beasts. If he, who 
was the teacher of meekness and the messenger 
of peace, was condemned to be crucified, what 
could the others, the Zealots and the entire nation, 
expect? He saw the coming miseries and catas- 
trophes that were soon to befall Judea, and his 
heart bled for his people and his country. 

However, the true state of affairs was not 
known at Jerusalem until late in the afternoon, 
for Caiaphas and his clique had done their best to 
mislead the people and confuse their minds as to 
the transactions in the palace of the Governor. 
It was quite late in the day "(about the ninth 



62 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 

hour) that the sun was darkened and the veil of 
the Temple rent in twain; and all the people that 
had come together, beholding that sight and the 
things that were done, smote on their breasts.' ' 
(Luke 24:48.) It was later that Joseph, the 
rich man of Arimathea, who was known to Pilate, 
obtained permission from the Governor to remove 
the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it. 

A terror fell upon the people of Israel — all 
hauds were weakened and all hearts melted. 
Even after they recovered from the shock, no 
one dared to offer advice or assume the leadership. 
It was long before the Jews awoke from their 
stupefaction and resolved to act as Jesus had 
advised before his death. An embassy was sent 
to Rome to complain to the Emperor of the 
cruelty and treachery of Pilate and his minion, 
the High Priest; but they received little consola- 
tion at Rome. Tiberius reproached them for 
what he was pleased to term "the Jesus rebellion." 
("Jewish Ency.," vol. 10, Pilate.) The intrigues of 
Pilate had thus succeeded, and the Emperor had 
been made to believe that Jesus had been planning 
a revolution and had been executed accordingly. 

The Jews had suffered on all sides. Their 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS 63 

divine leader, who alone could have saved the 
country from destruction, had been taken away 
from them on a false charge ; and later, this false 
charge had been brought against them again 
as a reason why their complaints should not be 
heard by Tiberius. But worst of all was, and is, 
the monstrous accusation that the. Jews were 
guilty of the crucifixion of their beloved leader. 
History does not offer a parallel to this cruelty. 
An enemy kills the only child of a stricken father 
and then shifts the guilt upon the shoulders of 
the bereaved parent. 

Since we can find no other parallel in history, 
ancient or modern, to compare to this, let us 
imagine one. Suppose, for a moment, that our 
American Revolution had not terminated as it 
did, and that General Washington had been 
captured by the English and tried for treason to 
King George. A few royalists, who were at the 
trial, were allowed to place themselves on record 
as desiring the execution of the great patriot. 
Years have passed by and the world has forgotten 
the two parties that existed in this country during 
the Revolution. Should one, reading the account 
of the trial, condemn all Americans because a few 



64 THE TRIAL OF JESUS 



royalists demanded the execution of Washington ? 
Would we not feel rather wronged at such a 
monstrous charge? So much more do the Jews 
feel the cruel injustice done to them and to their 
forefathers by the Christian world in placing this 
monstrous guilt upon their shoulders. 

It is high time that those who consider them- 
selves followers of Jesus should know the truth 
about their Master, and follow his example in 
endeavoring to bring about a true knowledge of 
God and to eradicate prejudice and substitute 
tolerance and kindness toward all men; in giving 
up hatred, and preaching, instead, love; and in 
teaching the whole world of the Fatherhood of 
God and the Brotherhood of Man. 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: July 2005 



A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 



Preservationlechnologie^ 



1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724) 779-21 1 1 





1 



I 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



f 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



1 1' 








0 ( 


9: 


L4 229 207 5 



